Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpoint() | KernelTrap

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpoint()

view
thread

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

[view in full thread]

From: Ingo Molnar

Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpoint()

Date: Friday, October 10, 2008 - 12:53 pm

* Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:

quoted text> > > Surely not ACPI-compliant.
> > 
> > what do you mean?
> 
> The ACPI spec says quite specifically what should be done while 
> entering hibernation and during resume from hibernation.  We're not 
> following that in the current code, but we can (gradually) update the 
> code to become ACPI-compilant in that respect.  However, if we go the 
> checkpointing route, I don't think that will be possible any more.

ah, i see. I did not mean to utilize any ACPI paths but simple powerdown 
or reboot.

If we checkpoint all apps to persistent disk areas (which the checkpoint 
patches in this thread are about), then we can just reboot the kernel 
and forget all its state.

That capability can be used to build a really robust hibernation 
implementation IMO: we could "hibernate/kexec" over between different 
kernel versions transparently. (only a small delay will be noticed by 
the user - if we do it smartly with in-kernel modesetting then not even 
the screen contents will be changed over this.)

	Ingo
--
unsubscribe noticeTo unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:

[RFC][PATCH 1/2] Track in-kernel when we expect checkpoint ..., Dave Hansen, (Thu Oct 9, 12:04 pm)

[RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpoint(), Dave Hansen, (Thu Oct 9, 12:04 pm)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpo ..., Serge E. Hallyn, (Thu Oct 9, 12:43 pm)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpo ..., Dave Hansen, (Thu Oct 9, 1:54 pm)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Track in-kernel when we expect checkp ..., Greg Kurz, (Fri Oct 10, 1:20 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Track in-kernel when we expect checkp ..., Daniel Lezcano, (Fri Oct 10, 1:37 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpo ..., Daniel Lezcano, (Fri Oct 10, 1:41 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpo ..., Ingo Molnar, (Fri Oct 10, 1:46 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Track in-kernel when we expect checkp ..., Greg Kurz, (Fri Oct 10, 1:47 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Track in-kernel when we expect checkp ..., Oren Laadan, (Fri Oct 10, 3:11 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpo ..., Cedric Le Goater, (Fri Oct 10, 3:17 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpo ..., Cedric Le Goater, (Fri Oct 10, 3:27 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpo ..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Fri Oct 10, 6:17 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpo ..., Serge E. Hallyn, (Fri Oct 10, 7:04 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpo ..., Ingo Molnar, (Fri Oct 10, 7:54 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Track in-kernel when we expect checkp ..., Ingo Molnar, (Fri Oct 10, 7:59 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Track in-kernel when we expect checkp ..., Oren Laadan, (Fri Oct 10, 8:17 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Track in-kernel when we expect checkp ..., Ingo Molnar, (Fri Oct 10, 8:28 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Track in-kernel when we expect checkp ..., Dave Hansen, (Fri Oct 10, 9:33 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Track in-kernel when we expect checkp ..., Greg Kurz, (Fri Oct 10, 9:34 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Track in-kernel when we expect checkp ..., Dave Hansen, (Fri Oct 10, 9:36 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpo ..., Greg Kurz, (Fri Oct 10, 9:45 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpo ..., Serge E. Hallyn, (Fri Oct 10, 10:13 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Track in-kernel when we expect checkp ..., Chris Friesen, (Fri Oct 10, 10:18 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpo ..., Dave Hansen, (Fri Oct 10, 10:28 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpo ..., Ingo Molnar, (Fri Oct 10, 12:53 pm)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpo ..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Fri Oct 10, 12:53 pm)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpo ..., Len Brown, (Fri Oct 10, 1:40 pm)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Track in-kernel when we expect checkp ..., Daniel Lezcano, (Fri Oct 10, 1:57 pm)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpo ..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Fri Oct 10, 3:57 pm)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpo ..., Pavel Machek, (Sat Oct 11, 6:48 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpo ..., Ingo Molnar, (Sat Oct 11, 8:00 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Track in-kernel when we expect checkp ..., Greg Kurz, (Mon Oct 13, 1:18 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpo ..., Greg Kurz, (Mon Oct 13, 1:20 am)

Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Trac